Same here. No, I'm not in Nebraska. I'm in Massachusetts, where I was involved with the local Dem group for several years and got to see the elitist myopia of the established Democratic Party up close and personal. There's a Democratic trifecta in my state, but the state legislature, especially the House, is near the bottom of every nati…
Same here. No, I'm not in Nebraska. I'm in Massachusetts, where I was involved with the local Dem group for several years and got to see the elitist myopia of the established Democratic Party up close and personal. There's a Democratic trifecta in my state, but the state legislature, especially the House, is near the bottom of every national list on transparency, effectiveness, and other criteria. I envy the activism and resourcefulness of Dems in states like North Carolina and Wisconsin.
"the elitist myopia of the established Democratic Party" -- this statement/observation is so interesting to me. I am a lifelong Dem, but oblivious about the inner workings of the Dem Party.
It's been a problem for every activist Democrat to deal with for at last as long as I have been an activist Democrat. When I went to work in politics, I cannot count the number of times I wanted to grab one of the idiots by their lapels and shake them silly as I screamed in their face, "DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?! DO YOU HAVE THE SLIGHTEST FUCKING CLUE??!!!" Because they didn't. They're members of the same club with the over-educated, under-intelligent, otherwise-unemployable low achievers of the upper middle class in the DC Press Corpse. I've long called them the Dumbocrap wing of the party.
So was I before I got involved with it, and even now my familiarity is entirely limited to my state (MA). I worked for Dem candidates in 2016, especially locally: we had FOUR races with no incumbent running (state senator, state rep, county sheriff, and register of deeds), and the Dems won all of 'em with very good candidates. I've learned to separate the candidates from the party apparatus, although of course they're connected. There *are* people working to reform the party structure from within, and if I were 30 or 40 years younger, I might join them -- but I'm not. <g>
Perhaps since MA has more educated people than any other state (I think), they think things through logically and come to the conclusion that everyone else either does, or should, agree with their points of view. As I think back, that's certainly the way things were when I was in my early 20's and politically active in Chapel Hill, NC (university town -- of course).
If you want a glimpse of that "educated people" are up to, take a look at what's going on at colleges and universities around Israel-Palestine. It's not monolithic, and it has a lot to do with money and long-held, unexamined assumptions. In MA, the Democratic Party is a big, unwieldy coalition, and many of those with power in the legislature are the direct descendants (often literally as well as politically) of the white urban ethnics who fought school busing in the 1960s and '70s. There's a reason the late Ed Brooke, the first African American to get elected to the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction, was a Republican. He was in the Senate 1967–1979. Before that he was the MA attorney general.
"There's a reason the late Ed Brooke, the first African American to get elected to the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction, was a Republican." That's a very interesting observation, to me.
I remember celebrating with my family that a Negro had been elected to the Senate. We lived in NC, and in1967 Civil Rights was obviously a massive issue. Desegregation was just 2 years old. That such a thing could (finally) happen in the U.S. was enormously important. I was 14 years old and remember thinking it was weird that he was a Republican. But I figured, whatever.
Not all that weird when you consider the political party alignment in New England (and, I gather, certain other areas). The big urban machines were heavily Democratic, so "clean government" types were often Republicans. The white South was just starting to flip to the GOP (Nixon's "southern strategy"). MA had a reasonable GOP governor as recently as 2022: Charlie Baker.
Yabbut think of the competition. I have clear memories of, among others, Wallace, Thurmond, Eastland, Stennis, Talmadge (the younger one: Herman), Faubus, Barnett, Maddox . . . Bilbo was a little before my time, but I sure as hell knew about him. Just found this impressive rogues' gallery. I recognized well over half of them. Now I'm curious about the others. https://segregationinamerica.eji.org/segregationists
You and Bill Maher are privy to the elitist Dems, I never was. I just slog along with the sheep. And glad to be far away from the “elite.” Always thought that was a Repub thing
Never met one, but I’ve heard criticism of DNC as such. And I know about the “machines” that ran some cities. But Dems have a better track record in my adult years than Repubs by a country mile. Maher refers frequently to the progressive elites and reports some pretty idiotic ideas that never cross my news feed. Yep, some negatives out there, but I’d guess 80% sane, 20% nuts as opposed to repubs 20% sane, 80% nuts. Just my sizing up what I see.
Same here. No, I'm not in Nebraska. I'm in Massachusetts, where I was involved with the local Dem group for several years and got to see the elitist myopia of the established Democratic Party up close and personal. There's a Democratic trifecta in my state, but the state legislature, especially the House, is near the bottom of every national list on transparency, effectiveness, and other criteria. I envy the activism and resourcefulness of Dems in states like North Carolina and Wisconsin.
"the elitist myopia of the established Democratic Party" -- this statement/observation is so interesting to me. I am a lifelong Dem, but oblivious about the inner workings of the Dem Party.
It's been a problem for every activist Democrat to deal with for at last as long as I have been an activist Democrat. When I went to work in politics, I cannot count the number of times I wanted to grab one of the idiots by their lapels and shake them silly as I screamed in their face, "DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?! DO YOU HAVE THE SLIGHTEST FUCKING CLUE??!!!" Because they didn't. They're members of the same club with the over-educated, under-intelligent, otherwise-unemployable low achievers of the upper middle class in the DC Press Corpse. I've long called them the Dumbocrap wing of the party.
So was I before I got involved with it, and even now my familiarity is entirely limited to my state (MA). I worked for Dem candidates in 2016, especially locally: we had FOUR races with no incumbent running (state senator, state rep, county sheriff, and register of deeds), and the Dems won all of 'em with very good candidates. I've learned to separate the candidates from the party apparatus, although of course they're connected. There *are* people working to reform the party structure from within, and if I were 30 or 40 years younger, I might join them -- but I'm not. <g>
Perhaps since MA has more educated people than any other state (I think), they think things through logically and come to the conclusion that everyone else either does, or should, agree with their points of view. As I think back, that's certainly the way things were when I was in my early 20's and politically active in Chapel Hill, NC (university town -- of course).
If you want a glimpse of that "educated people" are up to, take a look at what's going on at colleges and universities around Israel-Palestine. It's not monolithic, and it has a lot to do with money and long-held, unexamined assumptions. In MA, the Democratic Party is a big, unwieldy coalition, and many of those with power in the legislature are the direct descendants (often literally as well as politically) of the white urban ethnics who fought school busing in the 1960s and '70s. There's a reason the late Ed Brooke, the first African American to get elected to the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction, was a Republican. He was in the Senate 1967–1979. Before that he was the MA attorney general.
"There's a reason the late Ed Brooke, the first African American to get elected to the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction, was a Republican." That's a very interesting observation, to me.
I remember celebrating with my family that a Negro had been elected to the Senate. We lived in NC, and in1967 Civil Rights was obviously a massive issue. Desegregation was just 2 years old. That such a thing could (finally) happen in the U.S. was enormously important. I was 14 years old and remember thinking it was weird that he was a Republican. But I figured, whatever.
Not all that weird when you consider the political party alignment in New England (and, I gather, certain other areas). The big urban machines were heavily Democratic, so "clean government" types were often Republicans. The white South was just starting to flip to the GOP (Nixon's "southern strategy"). MA had a reasonable GOP governor as recently as 2022: Charlie Baker.
Not weird in retrospect. But VERY weird (and wonderful) to a Southern family whose Senator was the grotesque Jesse Helms.
He was a piece of work!
You're WAY too kind.
Yabbut think of the competition. I have clear memories of, among others, Wallace, Thurmond, Eastland, Stennis, Talmadge (the younger one: Herman), Faubus, Barnett, Maddox . . . Bilbo was a little before my time, but I sure as hell knew about him. Just found this impressive rogues' gallery. I recognized well over half of them. Now I'm curious about the others. https://segregationinamerica.eji.org/segregationists
Back then, all repubs weren’t guanofied (bat Schitt for brains).
You and Bill Maher are privy to the elitist Dems, I never was. I just slog along with the sheep. And glad to be far away from the “elite.” Always thought that was a Repub thing
What to you mean by "privy to the elitist Dems"? and who are "the elitist Dems"?
Never met one, but I’ve heard criticism of DNC as such. And I know about the “machines” that ran some cities. But Dems have a better track record in my adult years than Repubs by a country mile. Maher refers frequently to the progressive elites and reports some pretty idiotic ideas that never cross my news feed. Yep, some negatives out there, but I’d guess 80% sane, 20% nuts as opposed to repubs 20% sane, 80% nuts. Just my sizing up what I see.
Yes, that's what keeps me involved with the party.
Can’t imagine being a republican, Dem is hard enough.
May consider independent unless they continue to be spoilers. Dem works for now.